Why does the US get away with murder and its civillians shrug off collateral

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="almasdeathchild"]you see amercian soldiers pissing on corpses and just recently killed nine innocent kids.....yea people around the globe and U.S soil arnt pleased one bit

Nibroc420

At least the U.S. is not running torture chambers (we can discuss Gitmo and water-boarding another time, but these pale in comparison to what the enemy does) where we torment our captives with "chains, a bed - an iron bed that was still connected to a battery - knives and swords that were still covered in blood".

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="Lord_Omikron666"]I'm not even going to argue with you because you're just flat out wrong if you think we drop the bombs if we even think there's civilians involved.

vfibsux

So it was ok to kill civilians in 1945 but not now? I'm not being intellectually dishonest on the contrary I'm trying to argue without resorting to BS semantics that try to paint in a clearer picture on despicable acts by defining and redefining terms. Killing civilians in 1945 was as despicable as killing them now they just don't suddenly turn more despicable because someone decided to enact a law calling it so. Who in the end decides what is despicable or not at one point in time? It all depends on those who ultimately write history, they can decide something is alright at one point and at the next they change the definition so it is considered evil even if they acted that way before. Evil is evil today band in 1945. Definitions and semantics apart, killing innocent people is despicable no matter how much people try to cover it with euphemisms and then act morally superior because they did it. Besides I've heard people who still call Hiroshima and Nagasaki victims collateral damage and they jump in a fit when people mention it was a terrorist act.

Every major country is guilty of this.. The only ting I would argue is for people to open their eyes and understand that even countries like the United States are not some how the "good guys" and that people should stop being so hawkish when it comes to wars or the justification for them.sSubZerOo

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="vfibsux"] I saw a video of some black guys robbing a store, I saw a video of some muslims flying planes into buildings, I saw........I can do this all day dude. So what if you saw a video? I can show you videos of HUD tapes of hundreds of missions where we did NOT do that stuff, of course they are classified. Yes if you happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time we are not going to halt the mission because some guy walked in the area. It is regrettable but sometimes that is going to occur. We aren't like "drop it now!!! quick get that idiot walking in front of the building too rofl!!!!" And I am not going to blow smoke up your rear and try to tell you everyone is perfect on our side, it is NOT true. You DID see the video of the guys laughing about shooting up a van, yes it will happen. It is a minority, THAT I can promise you. Those scumbags and their leadership will suffer if they are found out, period.no-scope-AK47

The are about 1.5 MILLION soliders on active duty in United States Military right now. How many examples out of that number can you cite as "a serious problem". You can't imagine the missions run just by the Army and nobody can tell you but it is a very large number. Time after time the job was done with NO collateral damage or crime or inccident. The same goes for the rest of the branches granted I have never seen the numbers. So you hold up a couple of people that did wrong when so much has gone right.

There is a word for that propaganda ie a load of horse **** Use your head for more than a hat rack.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]The way I see it is the protection of civilians is a secondary objective to any of US's agenda.. If it was actually the main goal in these wars (which have really been all voluntary since WW2 more or less) there is so many more people that can be saved simply through humanitarian aid.. o0squishy0o

[QUOTE="Lord_Omikron666"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] And if the army knows the Taliban is using civilians as shields and shoots anyway? Is that also "collateral damage"? Who's fault it is? Should the army be given a free pass just because the Taliban put a civilians shield? I think both using civilians as shields and dropping bombs on top of places where they know civilian will be harmed is disgusting no matter what excuse they use to justify it. kuraimen

US can get away with it